Yet more thunder down under: An interview with Dr. John Ray
By Bernard Chapin
web posted January 26, 2004
In September of 2002, I ran across an essay at
frontpagemag.com called "The Psychology Underlying
Liberalism" by Dr. John Ray. I had never heard of the author
before but found his description of the left to be startlingly
accurate. I emailed it off to several friends and associates who
agreed with me considering the rare quality of its insight.
Since that time, Dr. Ray has added to his work and eventually
produced a monograph called, The Motivations of Political
Leftists, which is available for free online. He also runs a blog
called "Dissecting Leftism" which is updated frequently.
Dr. Ray is a former professor of sociology at the University of
New South Wales although his degree was actually in
psychology. Overall, he describes himself as being a social
scientist but is officially retired from formal academic pursuits.
Dr. Ray has written an extensive biography that you may wish to
read upon finishing our interview.
BC: Dr. Ray, let me begin by asking about your well-known,
The Motivations of Political Leftists. What is the reason why a
psychologist like yourself would become interested in so
meticulously deciphering leftist motivation and behavior? Does it
have anything to do with your university background?
JR: Most of my academic research was in fact concerned with
the psychology of politics so what you now read from me is the
result of decades of thought, reading and research. In the School
of Sociology where I spent most of my teaching career, almost
all of the other academics were Marxists of one sort or another
so I know the species very well from first-hand observation.
BC: For readers unfamiliar with your work, do you regard
radical leftism as being antithetical to the successful functioning of
political states? Also, in reference to radical leftists as individuals,
are many of them guilty of projecting their own personality
difficulties and conflicts upon their own countries?
JR: I think it is obvious from the world's many experiences of
Communism that radical Leftism is an unmitigated disaster for
anyone subjected to it. And I do think that the things Leftists
criticize most in others are the very faults that are most prominent
in themselves -- simplistic thinking for example. Psychologists
call that "projection" It reminds me of Christ's admonition to stop
worrying about the speck in your brother's eye and get rid of the
beam out of your own eye. Christ had obviously seen how
common projection was too.
BC: What would you say to those who regard notions of left and
right as being passÚ nowadays?
JR: The rejection of a one-dimensional Left/Right view of politics
is a respectable one and is widely supported among libertarians
but I have done a lot of survey research on the question and find
that only a single Left/Right polarity is to be found in public
opinion data.
BC: In your work, you describe yourself as a Libertarian and
then observe that rightist governments are generally less
meddlesome in their citizen's lives than are leftist governments.
This seems true enough, but is it possible for one to be a leftist
and a libertarian at the same time? I ask you this particular
question with an obnoxious American television personality at the
forefront of my mind.
JR: It is all a matter of degree but matters of degree are
important. I think conservatives are more favourable to liberty
than Leftists are but blind Freddy knows that conservatives can
support government coercion too on some occasions. As far as I
can see, however, liberty is totally left out of a Leftist philosophy.
There is ALWAYS something more important than liberty to a
Leftist. They only favour liberty when they think it will be
destructive of the society they live in - in areas of sexual morality,
for instance.
BC: Is there any hope for sociology? It seems to be the
discipline most corrupted by political correctness. Do you find
the field's current misuse as a PC bullhorn to be inevitableľ given
its historical origins? [By the way, I have met many educated
people who quote Margaret Mead authoritatively but know
nothing of her professional debunking].
JR: Sociology as I know it is just a form of Marxist theology --
fit only for second-rate minds. Mead is an anthropologist rather
than a sociologist and to this day most anthropologists seem to
defend her on the grounds that what she said SHOULD have
been right!
BC: Let's turn to your other area of expertise: psychology.
Personally, I'm teaching my eighth university psychology class at
the moment and have been sincerely disappointed by how drunk
the textbooks are with multiculturalism and the way in political
correctness is favored over coherence. What kind of damage do
you think PC, or what Hollander calls "the adversarial culture,"
has done to the study of psychology?
JR: Because most psychologists are Leftists -- with the typical
disregard for evidence that that implies -- psychology will never
be a science. I have pointed out the unscientific nature of the
psychological "research" I know of in the academic journals
many times. I advise you to abandon psychology and go into
business -- where you will almost certainly make a more honest
dollar. At the moment I see the whole discipline as a fraud on the
taxpayer.
BC: I just ran across this paragraph in an article from
techcentralstation.com. It juxtaposes liberals with conservatives
and argues: "Conservatives love history; liberals love sociology.
Conservatives are archaeologists; liberals are engineers." Given
your background in the psychology of liberalism, would you
agree with the author's analysis?
JR: It has a grain of truth. Conservatives endeavor to learn from
history; Liberals are only really interested in their own theories.
And Leftists certainly want to engineer us. And from Stalin to Pol
Pot, we know what that leads to.
BC: Lastly, and along a completely different line altogether, you
shared with me some personal experiences regarding feminism.
How do you think the feminist movement has altered our lives?
Can you share with our readers any horror stories regarding their
behavior at your university or towards yourself in particular?
JR: Feminists amuse me. I so often saw their angry eyes around
me in the School of Sociology that I know what motivates most
of them -- so I am also rather sorry that they are such
congenitally unhappy souls. Normal women, however, are a
delight. Fortunately, I have met a lot of the latter. I do know one
lady, however, -- a former colleague at university -- who calls
herself a feminist but whom I regard as an absolute saint. There
are holy people in all faiths.
Thank you for your time, Dr. Ray.
Bernard Chapin is a writer living in Chicago. He can be reached
at bchapafl@hotmail.com.
Enter Stage Right -- http://www.enterstageright.com